KUSHAL VINODKUMAR BHATT LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI VINODKUMAR RAMANLAL BHATT,ANAND vs. THE ACIT (OSD), WARD-5, ANAND
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member
And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member
Kushal Vinodkumar Bhatt
Legal Heir of Late Shri
Vinodkumar Ramanlal
Bhatt
Ambica Bhuban,
Opposite Big Bazar,
Anand, Vidyanagar Road,
Anand-388001, Gujarat
PAN: ACLPB2634C
(Appellant)
Vs
The ACIT (O ),
Ward-5, Anand
(Respondent)
Assessee Represented: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R.
Revenue Represented: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.D.R.
Date of hearing
: 25-06-2025
Date of pronouncement : 30-06-2025
आदेश/ORDER
PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Legal Heir of the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 30.01.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal
Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the exparte re-assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2011-12. Assessment Year 2011-12
I.T.A No. 752/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No KUshal Vinodkumar Bhatt Legal Heir of Late Shri Vinodkumar Ramanlal Bhatt. vs. ACIT
2
2. The registry has noted that there is delay of 96 days in filing the above appeal. The Legal Heir of the assessee filed a Notarized
Affidavit stating that extensive discussions with Chartered
Accountant on filing the above appeal on his deceased father name since it was setaside back to AO for de-nova assessment. More particularly, when the reopening notice u/s. 148 was issued on a deceased person. This has caused the delay in filing the appeal with a delay of 9 days and thereby requested to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue has no objection in condoning the delay thus the delay of 9 days in filing the above appeal is hereby condoned.
Brief facts of the case is that the assessee herein Mr. Vinod Kumar Bhatt was an individual and passed away on 11-02-2011. The assessee sold immovable properties amounting to Rs. 1,21,31,000/- on 26-08-2010 relevant to the Asst. Year 2011-12. However, the assessee has not filed Return of Income declaring the capital gain on sale of properties, which has escaped assessment. Therefore, the assessment was reopened by issuing notice u/s. 148 dated 27-03-2018 in the name of the dead person Shri Kushal Vinodkumar Bhatt which was duly served by Post. However, there was no response from the assessee. Therefore the A.O. issued notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act. In response the deceased assessee’s son informed that the Assessing Officer the death of his father by producing copy of the death certificate and also informed he does not know the various transactions carried out by his deceased father. The Assessing Officer called for information u/s.133(6)
I.T.A No. 752/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No KUshal Vinodkumar Bhatt Legal Heir of Late Shri Vinodkumar Ramanlal Bhatt. vs. ACIT
3
from the Sub-